Establishing a Pathway to Excellence® Research Agenda: A Delphi Study to Identify Research Priorities for Evaluating Positive Practice Environments.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to develop research priorities for positive practice environments identified by Pathway to Excellence® (Pathway) leaders and appraisers. BACKGROUND: Identifying research priorities achieves 2 goals: 1) advancing research agendas that impact improving practice environments, and nurse and patient outcomes; and 2) informing nursing leaders, researchers, and funders of potential research projects to conduct and support. METHODS: Research topics related to the 6 Pathway standards were developed and then rated for importance through 3 rounds of a Delphi survey by leaders at Pathway-designated organizations and Pathway appraisers. RESULTS: Twenty research priorities were identified from the initial 54 research topics. The top 2 priorities were building and maintaining shared governance participation (91.9%) and nurse participation in performance improvement and evidence-based practice activities (90.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Establishing a Pathway research agenda will guide nursing leadership, researchers, and funders in selecting impactful research priorities to help bolster positive practice environments that engage and empower nurses.

Credentialing and certification: Overview, science, and impact on policy, regulation, and practice.

AIM: To engage the global nursing community in sharing knowledge, experiences, and lessons learned about credentialing of individual nurses to improve nursing practice, patient safety, and quality of care. BACKGROUND: Although the United States has a long and robust history of credentialing individual nurses, the opportunity exists to expand the dialogue globally, and is supported by globally focused governing bodies who call for increased or expanded investment in nursing certification and credentialing. Foundational work to define and operationalize certification for research purposes and develop an administrative home for stakeholders interested in certification can be leveraged by countries and regions globally. Existing frameworks for credentialing research may be used to drive theory-based research in the future. SOURCES OF EVIDENCE: PubMed, International Council of Nurses, National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, World Health Organization, American Nurses Association, American Nurses Credentialing Center, and the authors' own experiences. DISCUSSION: Credentialing as a form of self-governance, as a method for public protection, and as a foundational element in the increasingly new forms of healthcare delivery is intensifying in importance. Credentials provide an opportunity to evaluate relationships between key elements such as nursing practice, environments where nursing care is delivered, and nursing programs with outcomes of interest for the profession such as safety, quality of care, and patient outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Establishing rigorous credentials for nurses demonstrates a commitment to excellence. Credentialing frameworks that are universally applied could enable nurses to move seamlessly across geographic boundaries, permit regulators and employers of nurses to have a common set of standards and expectations, and ensure a level of competency for nursing practice that can be interpreted and trusted by various stakeholders. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING POLICY: Policymakers have a pivotal role in advancing credentialing in nursing worldwide. Countries developing credentialing programs in nursing need to study their results to help inform how practice might be required to change over time.

Methods of nursing certification in North America-A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Definitions of nursing certification are lacking in the research literature and research on certification in nursing is remarkably limited. METHODS: A six-stage scoping review framework was used to identify the nature, extent, and range of certification within the nursing literature. FINDINGS: Thirty-six articles were included in this scoping review. Most originated in the United States (89%), were classified as research articles (56%), and used a quantitative approach (90%). The majority focused on initial certification (50%), and written examination was the most prevalent approach to certification (39%). Missing and incomplete data were prevalent. DISCUSSION: The overall lack of nursing certification origin, focus, methodological rigor, and clear certification mastery criteria have hindered meaningful study of the relationship between nursing certification and patient outcomes. Common data elements, reporting standards, and observational studies linking common data elements and patient outcomes could guide future research and improve the transparency of certification processes and reporting.

Constructing a Sensitizing Definition of Certification in Nursing for Research Purposes: A Hybrid Methodology Using Consensus-Building Approach.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to construct a sensitizing definition of certification in nursing for research purposes that can provide a foundation from which to further develop a coherent research program building evidence about the impact of certification on healthcare outcomes. BACKGROUND: The lack of a single definition of certification in nursing makes it difficult to draw conclusions about the relationship between specialty certification and patient outcomes. METHODS: This study was guided by the Delphi-Chaffee hybrid methodology proposed by Grant et al. DISCUSSION: Constructing a single, sensitizing definition of certification: 1) provides coherency for direction of certification research; 2) serves as a guide for researchers; and 3) facilitates multimethodological approaches to exploring the relationship among the different components of the definition of certification. CONCLUSION: A sensitizing definition of certification provides an opportunity for researchers to study the relationship between nursing certification and patient outcomes.

Conceptualization and Operationalization of Certification in the US and Canadian Nursing Literature.

OBJECTIVE: To identify how certification is defined, conceptualized, and discussed in the nursing literature. BACKGROUND: Although it is hypothesized that credentialing is associated with better patient outcomes, the evidence is relatively limited. Some authors have suggested that the lack of consistency used to define certification in nursing literature may be one of the dominant obstacles in credentialing research. METHODS: This scoping review was guided by Arksey and O'Malley's framework, and quantitative and qualitative analyses were conducted. RESULTS: The final data set contained a total of 36 articles, of which 14 articles provided a referenced definition of certification. Thematic analysis of the definitions yielded 8 dominant themes. CONCLUSION: The lack of a common definition of certification in nursing must be addressed to advance research into the relationship between certification processes in nursing and healthcare outcomes.

The Relationship Between Specialty Certification of Individual Nurses and Outcomes: Developing a Standardized Taxonomy for Research.

Specialty certification is an important method to demonstrate that RNs possess advanced training, knowledge, and competencies required to provide safe, high-quality care for specific populations.

Building Research Infrastructure in Magnet® Hospitals: Current Status and Future Directions.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to describe the infrastructures supporting research in Magnet® hospitals. BACKGROUND: Hospitals undertaking the journey toward Magnet designation must build research and evidence-based practice (EBP) infrastructures that support the infusion of research and EBP into clinical practice. METHODS: An electronic survey was developed and distributed to the chief nursing officer or Magnet coordinator of all Magnet hospitals between June 10, 2015, and July 8, 2015. RESULTS: Of the 418 Magnet hospitals invited, 249 responses (60%) were received. Resources dedicated to nursing research were difficult to isolate from those for EBP. Supporting clinical nurses' time away from the bedside remains a challenge. Nearly half (44%) indicated that research is conducted within the nurses' usual clinical hours, and 40% indicated that nurses participate on their own time. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitals use a variety of resources and mentor arrangements to support research and EBP, often the same resources. More targeted resources are needed to fully integrate research into clinical practice.

State of the research on credentialing: the Institute of Medicine Standing Committee on Credentialing Research in Nursing.

This column is presented to report an update on the status of research on credentialing in nursing by the director of the Institute for Credentialing Research at the American Nurses Credentialing Center. The author presents an overview of the 5 meetings held to explore this topic and recommendations for further study.

Starting a national conversation: the Institute of Medicine workshop on the future directions of credentialing research in nursing.

In this month's column, the director of research for the American Nurses Credentialing Center discusses outcomes of the Institute of Medicine Workshop on Credentialing Research in Nursing.

Funding big research with small money.

This department highlights change management strategies that maybe successful in strategically planning and executing organizational change initiatives.With the goal of presenting practical approaches helpful to nurse leaders advancing organizational change, content includes evidence-based projects, tools,and resources that mobilize and sustain organizational change initiatives.In this article, the guest authors introduce crowd sourcing asa strategy for funding big research with small money.

Credentialing: the need for a national research agenda.

A national research agenda is needed to promote inquiry into the impact of credentialing on health care outcomes for nurses, patients, and organizations. Credentialing is used here to refer to individual credentialing, such as certification for nurses, and organizational credentialing, such as American Nurses Credentialing Center Magnet recognition for health care organizations or accreditation of providers of continuing education in nursing. Although it is hypothesized that credentialing leads to a higher quality of care, more uniform practice, and better patient outcomes, the research evidence to validate these views is limited. This article proposes a conceptual model in which both credentials and standards are posited to affect outcomes in health care. Potential research questions as well as issues in research design, measurement, data collection, and analysis are discussed. Credentialing in nursing has implications for the health care professions and national policy. A growing body of independent research that clarifies the relationship of credentialing in nursing to outcomes can make important contributions to the improvement of health care quality.